This is indeed a tough call to make… the Bruins’ D-corps is a lot thinner than most people want to admit. Chara is an elite defenseman; his size and deftness with his stick (defensively, not offensively) will translate into a better +/- and more opportunities for whomever is paired with him. I like the idea of a Chara/JB pairing… Boychuck does very well in his own end, and he’ also starting to show his offensive upside (he played some forward in juniors and the AHL too, I believe). Not to mention, the kid can hit (see: the rearranged faces of Matt Stajan and Matt Ellis).

Learning from Chara, whom he has publicly expressed humble admiration and respect for, could be the best thing for Boychuck… he worked hard to get into that 1-2 pairing, and he delivered when put under pressure. The kid can play, and he’s always willing to learn. That’s a recipe for success, in my book.

After the top pairing, the 3-4 and 5-6 are up in the air, in my mind. Seidenberg would be a mainstay on the second pairing, for sure… but I think everyone else will have to earn their jobs. Each remaining D-man has their own seperate strength: Stuart has intensity and leadership, Hunwick has offensive skill and skating ability, McQuaid has size and grit that could be agitating against top-tier scorers, and Ferrence has some indescribable intangible factor that has given the B’s a better record with him than without him. I guess that training camp will give some time for chemistry to develop. Can’t wait to see how it all turns out!

not sold on Boychuk, like him, but like Kalman pointed out, on a team that you think of as a championship team, he’s not a top 4 guy. I voted for Stuart, due to his physical presence, leadership ability, being a lefty allows Chara to patrol the left wing where most NHL studs are at (B oychuk and McQuaid are the only other righties, McQuaid is likely the 7th dman, and Boychuk will fit in nicely on the second pairing with Seidenberg, or on the bottom pairing where he probably really belongs, and its probably mroe important to have the weaker pairing include someone on each hand to allow for quicker breakouts), and as a former 1st rounder with high expectations I think its time the B’s let him sink or swim. He has to be cut a break from last year due to injury, whereas a guy like Boychuk filled that role by default, and guys like Hunwick were terrible. When players are given the extra ice time they often rise to the challenge and get the experience they need to improve, like we saw with Boychuk last year, Hunwick the year before, and Wideman leading up to last year. I just know that Stuart will suceed. Stuart was playing top 4 minutes for much of last year before he was hurt, by earning it, not by default. Its been a long time coming and let him sink or swim.

In my opinion it all comes down to where you put Seidenberg. As Kalman pointed out in his latest blog, Seids has been a solid number 2 with Chara, but historically he has been somewhat inconsistent. Do you put him with Big Z, have them eat up 26-30 minutes a night, and then let the other 4 divide up the remaining TOI? Or do you bring Boychuck in the first pairing, and really lean on Z to clean up the mess WHEN Boychuck makes mistakes (let’s face it, he has 50-ish games in the NHL, he still has a lot of learning to do). In this scenario you are spreading the wealth around a little bit and creating 2 solid D-pairings and one good D-pairing

I guess its a difference of philosophy. By brining Boychuck up to the 1st D-pair, you are really putting him in the fast lane. Either he develops at a rate much better than he would normally – OR – he becomes too much of a liability against every top pairing every night. Conversely, if you have Seids and Big Z together, that is going to be a great top pair, but the D-corps really shows their thinness in the remaining pairings. I favor the opportunity to spread the wealth a little bit, and have a Seids/Stuart pairing and a Z/Boychuck pairing.

… But what the heck do I know, I sit in front of a computer for a living and watch hockey in my living room.

I go with boychuck because he bring another very physical presence with another very hard shot to the top line. He might be better because of Chara, but I say take advantage! He is first a defensive d-man who can bring the offense when appropriate, and I think for Boston’s game that is really what you would like to see from a top liner. I feel like Sides can do the same, though I’m rather interested to see each without Big Z. I doubt we will really know the answer to what the top line is until the bottom two lines gain the appropriate chemistry. I think that is the most determining factor in who should play with Chara.

I have chara with seidenberg. Boychuk with Stuart. Ferrence with Hunwick/McQuaid.

I think Seidenberg is going to be a good defender for us, but I am worried that the success he had here last season was because he was paired with Z… take the two apart, and I dont think Seids will be as strong. Same can be said for Boychuk, but I like him on the 2nd pair because I dont think he is ready to face top line guys night in/night out. Also, by splitting Z and Boychuk, you are splitting the 2 best shots from the point when it comes to offense. Besides, I would love to see a Boychuk/Stuart combo…guys can really lay the hammer down.

I think McQuaid and Hunwick are going to be in a very tight race for the last spot. I like McQuaid because of his size. A Hunwick/Ferrence combo is pretty small.

Have to go with Boychuk here. One, he proved he could do it last year. Two, and more important IMO, I’d like to have Z & Seidenburg split up creating a stronger, deeper d-corp as mentioned in the earlier post.

I voted for Ference. Seidenberg is solid, and I’d put he and Z each with one of the youngsters. Why Ference? I think putting him with Chara will give him some room to make some mistakes, and hopefully the confidence to step up and be the player that the organization sees (i.e., contract extension). I’m fearful that he’d fall into the trap Wideman did: trying to play like a #1 or #2 defenseman, when that’s not your role.